6 July 2021

Central Plains Water Trust

Buddle Findlay
PO Box 9424
Tower Junction
Christchurch 8149

Dear Sir/Madam

Notice of Lapse Date Extension Decision

Applicant Name: Central Plains Water Trust

Location: Steeles Road Darrochs Road Sleemans Road the Rakaia River
end, TE PIRITA

Consent Number: CRC062680

Consent Type: Land Use Consent (s13) - New Consent
Activity: To disturb the bed and banks of the Rakaia River to excavate
and construct galleries and associated pipelines, form diversion
channels and construct temporary settlement ponds within the
bed of the Rakaia River.

Consent Number: CRC062685

Consent Type: Water Permit (s14) - New Consent
Activity: To divert, take and use water from the Rakaia River

Consent Number: CRC063823

Consent Type: Land Use Consent (s13) - New Consent
Activity: To remove vegetation and disturb and deposit soil, whilst
excavating and placing pipelines, within 7.5 meters of the Rakaia
River bank.

Decision: Decline
The decision of the consent authority is to decline your application for an extension to
the lapsing date of the above listed resource consents. These resource consents
therefore lapsed on 25 Jul 2020 and to carry out the activities specified in these resource
consents at the site are no longer authorised.

Consideration
Section 125(1A)(b) of the Resource Management Act 1991 allows a consent authority
to grant an application to extend a lapse period only after it has taken the following
matters into account:
 i. Substantial progress or effort has been, and continues to be, made towards
giving effect to the consent; and

ii. The applicant has obtained approval from persons who may be adversely
affected by the granting of the extension; and

iii. The effect of the extension on the policies and objectives of any plan or
proposed plan.

Decision Maker Comments

I have considered all the matters specified in 125(1A)(b)(i)(ii)(iii) and decided to decline
the lapse extension application. In doing so I have considered all the matters outlined in
this memo and the application made by Ms Fiona Crombie dated 30 June 2020, as well
as the decision documents for the original consent and all correspondence on file since.

In reaching my conclusion I have paid particular regard to 125(1A)(b)(i), that is whether

substantial progress or effort has been, and continues to be, made towards giving effect
to the consent. However, I also consider there are some adversely affected parties and
also effects on relevant statutory planning documents that are more than minor- namely
the Canterbury Land and Water regional Plan, the National Water Conservation (Rakaia
River) Order 1988, the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 and
the Mahaanui Iwi Management Plan 2013.

Has substantial progress or effort been, and continues to be, made towards giving effect
to the consent?

I note that 10 years has passed since the substantive water permit was granted and 13
years since the associated consents were granted. I also note that two extensions to
lapse dates have also been granted and this application is for an extension of 10 years,
which would bring it up to within 1 year of the expiry date. I consider that despite the
challenges experienced and explained by the consent holder this is a considerable
amount of time has passed to give effect to these consents. It appears that while effort
was initially made, hence the two extensions already granted, I was provided insufficient
evidence by way of contracts or agreements to demonstrate sufficient ongoing effort to
give effect to these consents. I also note that much of the land within the command area
of the take and use consent CRC062685, is already irrigated.

Are other parties adversely affected?

I am of the view there are adversely affected parties that have not provided approval for
the extension application pursuant to 125(1A)(b)(ii). The water take and use consent
CRC062685 contains conditions 4-9 that require agreements with 16 third party consent
holders. These conditions enable ‘spare’ water not taken and used by the specified third
parties, to be utilised by this consent holder. These are specified as separate rates and
30 day volumes for each of the 16 third parties and also a multitude of different monthly
flow restrictions as specified in Clause 7 of the Rakaia Water Conservation Order. These
Conditions are extremely complex. The water metering complexities associated with
complying with the changeable rates, volumes, and flow limits that apply to each of the
16 third parties at any given point in time is so complex they have proven to be
unworkable and impractical in another consent held by CPW (CRC167218). This has
resulted in the consent holder is using a method not specified in the consent to take the
‘spare’ water it is authorised, which we now have evidence is resulting in a breach of the
allocation limit in the WCO and having adverse effects on the lower Rakaia River and
existing consent holders not considered at the time. Due to this, I have reached the
conclusion the 16 third parties specified in CRC062685 are likely to be adversely
affected by the granting of this extension.

Is there an effect on the policies and objectives of any plans?

I consider granting this application would be contrary to Policy 4.73 of the CLWRP which
addresses Consent Term, Lapse Periods and Giving Effect to Water Permits. This policy
specifies Resource consents to take water shall be given effect to within three years
unless a longer lapsing period is justified due to the scale or complexity of the activity. I
consider that while this is a relatively large water take and there is some complexity
around giving effect to it, granting a further extension to within one year of the expiry
date, on top of the two extensions already granted, would be contrary to this policy.

Further, the National Water Conservation (Rakaia River) Order 1988 sets flow and
allocation limits on the Rakaia River to provide for its outstanding characteristics and
features. While consents have been granted to comply with these limits, there is
evidence to suggest the way they have been implemented (see complexities explained
above) has lead to these limits being exceeded, resulting in adverse effects on the lower
part of the river that were not anticipated when the Order was granted.

I have also considered the effect of granting this extension on other statutory documents.
In so doing I have placed strong weight on Policy WM8.7(1)(iv) of the Mahaanui IMP,
which covers this area. This Policy includes a strong direction to cancel consents that
have not being given effect to in stressed and over-allocated catchments, of which the
Rakaia River is one.

Finally, I have considered this lapse extension in the context of the NPSFM 2020. I note
the NPSFM has three major Objectives: stop further degradation of freshwater; reverse
past damage; and recognise the importance of Te Ao Māori in freshwater management.
The NPSFM 2020 cements the concept of Te Mana O te Wai and requires that decision
makers put the health and well-being at the forefront of discussions and decisions
relating to freshwater. It introduces the hierarchy of obligations which includes 1st, 2nd
and 3rd order priorities as the health and wellbeing of waterbodies & ecosystems; human
health needs; and social, cultural, economic well-being- in that order. In the context of
Te Mana o te Wai, I have placed weight on the Mahaanui IMP and the policy to address
water allocation and ensure water is used sustainably. To this end I have considered the
details around the primary water permit CRC062685 and the implications of granting an
extension in the face of evidence that the Rakaia River flow allocation limits, as
expressed in the WCO are likely to be exceeded due to the existing allocations and
complexities of implementing some of the permits already in existence and given effect
to. This, when considered in the context of Te Mana o te Wai and the hierarchy of
obligations, has led me to the conclusion granting this extension will be contrary to the
Objectives of the NPSFM 2020- namely it would not stop further degradation of the
Rakaia River and therefore is not consistent with the hierarchy of obligations.

Conclusion

In conclusion, having regard to all the s125(1A)(b) matters and balancing them against
the reasons put forward by the applicant to grant a 10 year extension and noting they all
depend on the water take and use consent CRC062685, I have decided to decline the
lapse extension for all the above consents.
Advisory note
If you wish carry out the activities specified in the resource consents listed above at
Steeles Road Darrochs Road Sleemans Road the Rakaia River end, TE PIRITA, you
will have to either:

1. Apply for a new resource consent; or

2. Contact Environment Canterbury with the new consent number if a replacement
consent has already been applied for or been granted; or
3. If the circumstances that existed at the time the lapsed consent was granted have
changed, please contact our Customer Services section by telephoning (03) 353
9007 or toll free on 0800 EC INFO (0800 324 636) to check if a consent is still
required.

Your rights of objection and appeal

If you do not agree with the decision, there are the following options you may pursue:

1. Objection to decision
You may object in whole or to any part of the decision in accordance with section
357A of the Resource Management Act 1991. Notice of any objection must be in
writing and lodged with Environment Canterbury within 15 working days of
receipt of this decision.

2. Right to appeal
Alternatively you may appeal to the Environment Court, PO Box 2069,
Christchurch. The notice of appeal must be lodged with the Court within 15
working days of receipt of this decision, with a copy forwarded to Environment
Canterbury within the same timeframe.

If you are in any doubt about the correct procedures, in the first instance refer to section
357C of the RMA which details the procedure for making these objections. You may also
wish to seek legal advice.

Queries
For all queries please contact Customer Services, quoting your CRC number noted
above.

Yours sincerely

Richard Purdon
Principal Consents Planner